I'm reading Qing Liu. I feel confused about the proof of theorem 4.3.12 and corollary 3.14.

Theorem 4.3.12. Let $f$ be a morphism of locally Noetherian schemes. Let $x\in X$ and $y= f(x)$. Then $\dim (\mathcal{O}_{X_y,x})\geq \dim (\mathcal{O}_{X,x})-\dim (\mathcal{O}_{Y,y})$. If, moreover, $f$ is flat, then we have equality. enter image description here

My question:

1.(red sentences) How do we know $t$ is not invertible in $B=\mathcal O_{X,x}$?

2.(green sentence) After base change with respect to $Y'$, $X'\rightarrow X$ is a closed immersion. But why $x$ is in $X' = X\times_YY'$?

Corollary 4.3.14. Let $f:X\rightarrow Y$ be a flat subjective morphism of algebraic varieties. We suppose that $Y$ is irreducible and that $X$ is equidimensional. Then for every $y\in Y$, the fiber $X_y$ is equidimensional, and we have $\dim(X_y) = \dim(X)-\dim(Y)$ enter image description here

My Question: Qing Liu defines algebraic variety as Noetherian scheme of finite type over $k$. That means $X_i$ may not be reduced. But Proposition 2.5.23(a) only works for domains. In this case how to get the highlight equality?

Theorem 2.5.15 Let $(A,\frak m)$ be a Noetherian local ring, $f\in \frak m$. Then we have $\dim(A/fA)\geq \dim(A)-1$. Moreover, equality holds if $f$ is not contained in any minimal prime ideal of $A$.

Theorem 2.5.23(a) Let $A$ be a finitely generated integral domain over $k$. Let $p$ be a prime ideal of $A$, we have $\operatorname{ht}(p) + \dim(A/p) = \dim(A)$.

  1. $A\to \mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ is a local homomorphism of local rings, so it sends $\mathfrak{m}_A$ to $\mathfrak{m}_x$. $t$ is in the first by assumption, so it's in the second, and the maximal ideal of a local ring is precisely the non-invertible elements.

  2. Since $Y'\to Y$ hits $y$ by construction, there are maps from $\operatorname{Spec} k(x)$ to $Y'$ and $X$ which agree after composing with the map to $Y$. So there's a map $\operatorname{Spec} k(x)\to X'$ which after composing with $X'\to X$ agrees with the map $\operatorname{Spec} k(x)\to X$ which picks out $x$. As $X'\to X$ is a closed immerison, this means $x\in X'$.

  3. Dimension is a purely topological invariant insensitive to the scheme structure. So you can replace your scheme by its reduction.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your answer. For (2), why there is a morphism $Spec k(x)\rightarrow Y'$(I understand there is $Spec k(y)\rightarrow Y'$). For (3), could we use the same argument to generalize theorem 2.5.23(a) to $A$ not necessary domain? $\endgroup$ – Hydrogen Mar 21 at 0:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The fact that $x$ maps to $y$ means there's a map of residue fields $k(y)\to k(x)$, or a map of spectra $\operatorname{Spec} k(x)\to\operatorname{Spec} k(y)$. Compose with the map you know. Secondly, no, not without further adjustments - consider something like $R=k[x,y,z]/(xy,xz)$: this has dimension $2$, but the quotient by the prime ideal $(z)$ gives the ring $k[x,y]/(xy)$ which is of dimension one. Thinking about the geometry of that should be instructive. $\endgroup$ – KReiser Mar 21 at 0:32
  • $\begingroup$ It seems that the statement holds when $Spec(A)$ is irreducible but not necessary reduced. $\endgroup$ – Hydrogen Mar 21 at 3:46
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry. I have one last question. In proof of corollary 3.14, he says 'Since x is a closed point, k(x) is algebraic over k(y)'. I'm confused about this. $\endgroup$ – Hydrogen Mar 21 at 5:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ 1. Yes, $\operatorname{Spec} A$ irreducible means $A/Nil(A)$ is a domain. 2. $x$ is a closed point in a scheme locally of finite type over a field, apply Zariski's lemma. $\endgroup$ – KReiser Mar 21 at 6:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.